|
Jt:We've been down this road over the last few
months. IMO God will continue to work through you in your faithful service to
Him. This, in spite of (IMO), your thoroughgoing misapprehension of Jesus'
humanity. 'Nuff said.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: March 01, 2005 06:44
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Albert Einstein
& Karl Barth
Jt:'it sounds like Barth exalts the "human"' Had
you noticed that God, in Christ, exalts the 'human'.?
jt: God, in Christ does
not "exalt the human" Lance, you miss the whole point of the
cross. The first Adam along with all of humanity were nailed to the cross with the man Jesus as
representative - then following the resurrection a New Creation
was made in Christ. The Church was birthed on the day of Pentecost when the
Holy Spirit of Promise was sent to indwell mankind. The first Adam was earthy, the second Adam the Lord from
heaven. The first became a living soul, the second a life-giving
Spirit. If your hope is in
the first Adam Lance, it is in vain. You need to be born of the Spirit
to be found in Christ at His return or you will be judged with the
world..
JD, I have not and do not intend to read Karl
Barth but I see from what you write that you look up to and respect
him as a man of God. I'm just wondering what, (other than confusion) could come from his
writings? Because to me it sounds like Barth exalts the
"human" and follows his own private "revelation" - or does Wikipedia have it wrong?
judyt
Wikipedia states the following about Karl Barth:
Barth's theology assumes a certain amount of the tenets of liberal Christianity,
most notably the assumption that the Bible is not
historically and scientifically accurate. Barth has been called
by fundamentalist Christianity a "neo-Orthodox"
because, while his theology retains most or all of the tenets of Christianity,
he rejects Biblical
inerrancy. His reconciliation of having a rigorous Christian
theology without a supporting text that was considered to be historically
accurate was to separate theological truth from historical truth. It is
arguably for this belief that Barth has been criticized the most harshly
by more conservative Christians such as the late Dr.
Francis A. Schaeffer.
The relationship between Barth, liberalism and fundamentalism goes far
beyond the issue of inerrancy. From Barth's perspective,
liberalism (with Schleiermacher and Hegel as its leading exponents) is the
divinization of human thinking. Some philosophical
concepts become the false God, and the voice of the living God is
blocked. This leads to the captivity of theology by human
ideology. In Barth's theology, he emphasizes again and again that human
concepts can never be considered as identical to God's revelation.
In this aspect, Scripture is also written human language,
expressing human concepts. It cannot be considered as identical as God's
revelation. However, in His freedom and love, God truly reveals
the Godself through human language and concepts. Thus he claims that
Christ is truly presented in Scripture and the preaching of the church.
Barth stands in the heritage of the Reformation in his weariness of the
marriage between theology and philosophy. Whether his sharp
distinction between human concepts and divine revelation is biblical or
philosophically sound remains debatable.
|
